Man of the Year
Sirs:
Your selection of Mr. Roosevelt as Man of the Year deserves great praise from clear-thinking subscribers. Winston Churchill's epic words, "Never have so many owed so much to so few," can include this magnanimous figure as one of the "few.". . .
STEPHEN M. WALSH JR.
Lynn, Mass.
Sirs:
. . . Congratulations on your Man of the Year in the Jan. 5 issue. . .
You have done one of the finest things possible to encourage statesmanship and leadership by publishing this article. . . .
Particular commendation to all of the men you mention and more specifically to a man from a country never before so united under one great leader--Chiang Kaishek.
J. D. BATES
Springfield, Mass.
Sirs:
TIME marches backward. Important as his job is, tremendous as are his duties, vigorously and conscientiously as he is prosecuting them --President Roosevelt was not the Man of the Year in 1941.
For his superb preparation and defense of the Philippines--almost entirely lacking in planes and tanks, which are at least 95% of modern warfare's materiel--General Douglas MacArthur was 1941's Man of the Year with no close competitors.
MORRIS A. BEALLE
Washington, D. C.
Sirs:
Franklin D. Roosevelt was 1941 Man of the Year, but Adolf Hitler remains the world's No. 1 poisonality.
HALFORD R. HOUSER
Managing Editor
Cape Cod Standard-Times
Hyannis, Mass.
Sirs:
It was with great disappointment that I received my Jan. 5 copy of your magazine. This disappointment was occasioned by your photograph* of the Man of the Year, our President, Franklin D. Roosevelt. The picture on your front cover portrays him as an old, wornout, fatigued man, and does not disclose . . . the fire and fighting qualities with which he is so richly endowed. . . .
ROBERT H. DOMESEK
Attorney at Law
Pittsburgh, Pa.
> With nine turbulent years in office behind him and an unknown number of war years ahead, it would be astonishing if Franklin Roosevelt showed no signs of strain; it is astonishing that, most of the time, he shows so little.--ED.
"Man-and-a-Half"
Sirs:
Your description of Churchill as "wholly British and half American" is aptly put, to say the least. If ever any man rated the title of "Man-and-a-Half" it's the British Prime Minister.
H. P. LATOURELLE Minnesota Valley Canning Co. New York City
Sirs:
. . . Please tell whoever did the Winston Churchill piece in the Jan. 5 number . . . what a good writer he is. Churchill as "wholly British and half American" is perfection. I wish to heaven I'd thought of it....
JANET FLANNER The New Yorker New York City
> Writer Janet Flanner, who as "Genet" filed some of the best European dispatches of the last decade, has no need to be overmodest.--ED.
Psychological Reasons
Sirs:
Twenty-six nations signed in Washington the pledge for the common struggle for freedom and victory over Hitlerism. The importance of this declaration has been stressed in advance by Herr Hitler himself as far back as Feb. 27, 1925. . . . Referring to World War I he said: "The Allies ... did not say: 'We fight Germany and Austria and Bulgaria and Turkey.' No, on the contrary, they always stressed: 'We are fighting the Kaiser and militarism only.' Whether they fought in Mesopotamia or Russia, France, Serbia or elsewhere, the enemy remained the same. . . .
"By this method they united 26 nations against Germany.* Now realize how immensely this must have strengthened the morale of every single Britisher. He must have felt: 'Can we be wrong, if 26 are with us . . .?' Whereas in our country (i.e., Germany) the man in the street asked himself: 'Can we be right, if 26 are against us? . . .' "It is absolutely necessary, especially for a people like the Germans, to show them one single enemy and to march against one single enemy only. . . ."
Herr Hitler certainly knows where the weak spots of German morale lie. It should be easy to draw the conclusions.
KONRAD HEIDEN [Address omitted by request.]
> Thanks to Reader Heiden, onetime Frankfurter Zeitung correspondent, ace Hitler biographer, for a bright sidelight from the past and a cheering implication for the future.-ED.
Ineffaceable Memory
Sirs:
REMEMBER PEARL HARBOR! That, it is certain, no presently living American will ever fail to remember. . . .
But . . . there is a vastly more important remembrance that must be indelibly burned into the consciousness of every American. . . .
Lest we forget. In December 1937--but four years ago--the Jap Army conquered the capital city of China. . . . Forty-two thousand people were murdered. Many were tied together in batches of 50, sprinkled with kerosene and set on fire; thousands were used for bayonet and sword practice by the Jap soldiers.
States one authoritative historian (Snow): "Anything female between the ages of 10 and 70 was raped. Discards were often bayoneted by drunken soldiers. Frequently mothers had to watch their babies beheaded and then submit to raping. . . . Some 50,000 troops in the city were turned loose for over a month in an orgy of rape, murder, looting and general debauchery."
There, fellow Americans, is the record, the undisputed record. . . .
Yes, we must all--and forever--remember Pearl Harbor. But also, and with ineffaceable memory, let every father and mother, every son and daughter, every husband and wife, every brother and sister, let every American burn into his or her soul the watchwords and the battle cry:
Remember the Rape of Nanking.
W. A. PICKERING
San Antonio, Tex.
Without Poppycock
Sirs:
. . . The article "Business in 1941" [TIME, Jan. 5] is the most thought-provoking and incisive article on business and the war that I have read. The discussion of OPM is most interesting, particularly to an ex-OPMite, but the whole thing hangs together on a clear line of understanding without the usual poppycock. . . .
STANLEY M. COOPER
New Britain, Conn.
Sirs:
Your article on Business in 1941 is a model in technique for all of us who are trying to understand and explain the violent impact of the war. . . .
RAYMOND CLAPPER
Washington, D.C.
Sirs:
Most useful, most important! . . .
WALTER LIPPMANN
New York City
Sirs:
The article ... is too superficial a study, although many things are well said. You are wrong in saying the old guard is not in Washington because of hatred of Roosevelt. They were not there because they were not wanted by the Administration and were not invited. Business has still during the last year been the whipping post of the Administration, while labor has been coddled and won every contest. . .
GEORGE W. DAVISON
Central Hanover Bank and Trust Co.
New York City
Sleep Killer
Sirs:
I was told that more than a year ago--while I was still in France--your paper published an article . . . with a special description of my anti-Hitler broadcasts over a secret transmitter. You mentioned one of my broadcasts addressed at nighttime to Hitler personally. Because of those nocturnal broadcasts they called me in France, "The man who kills Hitler's sleep. . . ."
I would very much appreciate a copy of the article in which I am mentioned. . . .
MAX OPHUELS
Hollywood, Calif.
> To Sleep Killer Ophuels, a cinema director in Germany before he fled that country, a clipping of TIME'S June 3, 1940 story, which told how he crooned advice to Hitler on overcoming insomnia, suggested he try counting the number of his victims. "You must have a tranquil conscience," crooned Max Ophuels. "Good night, Adolf Hitler."--ED.
*It was not a photograph but a portrait.
*Actually only 23 Allied nations were fighting against Germany proper.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.